3,546 karma · joined November 8, 2010
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/mh; my proof: https://keybase.io/mh/sigs/Tyd7C9EJoNBqCiwnhIP_syW4U7CrE-BvkpuJYdAlnmk ]
https://www.pangram.com/history/67234835-58ff-4603-ba17-2234...
Now I'm tempted to try again, because it feels like the kind of game I should really enjoy.
There was a real risk of their trademark getting Kleenex'd, at least in the US.
It's very obvious when looking at the reviews for certain new indie games. All LLM written comments, most short, most low playtime.
Then actual customers come along and buy the game and over the next few weeks the game craters from Mostly Positive to Mostly Negative.
"This community has absorbed new processes and tools many times over its 35-year history, and will almost certainly find a way to do that this time as well. But that absorption has not always been without turbulence along the way."
Open source has historically meant you could download the source and build your own binary. The appropriate analogue here, IMHO, to the build->binary process is training->weights.
The textbox below it says Paste image link, but you can actually paste an image from your clipboard here, too.
If folks are going to analyze this claim with a critical eye, I'd be zeroing in on "average" rather than acting like this measurement is somehow unclear.
it's linked from https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=1718627440
unless I'm misunderstanding what you're after.
Not saying that they're shooting for either of those segments, but someone should. Plenty of enterprise orgs that need (or are convinced they need) Jira's featureset.
At the risk of explaining a joke: Windows tries to get you to set up things like OneDrive on startup with a "do it now" or "remind me later", there's no "never ask me about this again".
However, I also agree that I haven't seen any robust data from someone tracking it daily/weekly. The handful of sites purporting to do this aren't even running it enough times to hit stat sig.
edit: someone linked one elsewhere in this thread called AI Stupid Level - they "run 7 trials instead of just 1". I don't blame them. Doing this in a statistically sound manner would cost a small fortune.
This was in an era of much more limited upstream bandwidth. The p2p nature was obscured from non-technical users in some implementations. So on and so on. I'm sure there are plenty of writeups from that era detailing why it was a bad idea.
These companies already used capable CDNs to distribute patches. It was a way for them to shift their CDN bill onto their paying customers.